I'm not too optimistic about AoU. Hank Pym isn't defined by Ultron, but Ultron is arguably defined by Hank Pyn (to an extent). The relationship between the two characters has been accepted as essential parts of either character's history for decades. I can't help but feel more than a bit sceptical about Joss possibly changing the story of Ultron's character possibly too far, cutting out another entirely and possibly forcing someone else in Hank's role (like Tony Stark and/or Bruce Banner).

Spot on. I don't get it why deviate so much from the mythos and neglect such a pivotal Avenger like Pym? They could easily introduce him as a new character and do so many interesting things with him, show the flawed side of his self, his bad temper with his wife and so many other things.

It's enough that he wasn't a founding member of the team, but getting the short end of the stick in the sequel also? I call this EPIC FAIL. :

Hank Pym has been in every iteration of the Avengers from the very beginning, including Ultimates, including Mighty, including Initiative, including West Coast. He is an integral part of the team, and omnipresent in Avengers comics.

How is that an unreasonable comparison, in your opinion? Keeping in mind that my statement isn't about powersets, or popularity, or rank. Just about importance to the actual team and actual comic title.

So?

I don't mean to be dismissive, but you do realize that the excitement involvng the Avengers films has never been its comic book origins, right? It was just the best excuse to get the biggest superheroes Marvel still had the rights to on the screen together. S.H.I.E.L.D., Black Widow, Hawkeye...their only narrative purpose was to help facilitate these four entities interacting with one another. The fact that they existed within the Avengers comic book narrative was almost...beside the point, really.

I say this because I have to wonder if fans have really deluded themselves into thinking that Hank Pym was ever going to be a primary member of the team. Let's say an Ant-Man movie never existed. Let's say Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne were present from the first film onward, and perhaps even fought alongside the other Avengers. Do you really think they would have been fleshed out...like, at all? Of course not! They would have existed functioning in the same way Black Widow and Hawkeye did...as satellites orbiting the Big 4. Their story would be marginalized and brushed aside as soon as the big guns appeared together on screen.

That's just the way it is. The Avengers movie franchise exists for a very different reason than the comic books existed. The only thing I really fault Whedon with is using Ultron at all. Fans are going to expect certain things, and without Hank Pym, he becomes Ultron in name only.

But I totally get it. Whedon is a creator first, and a geek second. His geek side wants to see Ultron in his Avengers movie, but his creator side doesn't want to be beholden to the comics. "Ya, well, I can't make an Ultron character that meshes with the comic books? Then I'll make my own Ultron character, with blackjack and hookers!"

Personally, I trust Whedon to at least make Ultron compelling, with or without Hank Pym. Maybe that's not enough for some people. So be it.

As I've been repeatedly saying: It has been known for YEARS that Wright said Scott Lang is protagonist in his Ant-Man story and Hank Pym is old. People are acting like this never happened. I've been saying since yesterday people are taking for granted the idea of Pym being an important figure in the MCU one day.

Yeah I thought Pym was supposed to be the Danny Ocean type character in a heist movie that Wright hinted at Ant-Man becoming. Lang would be the main guy, but Pym would be the sort of mentor. Maybe he was a relevant superhero in the 70's and 80's that had ties to the initial development of Ultron. Something like the Sentinels in X-Men where work on them began as early as the 70's as the new movie is laying out. I think Hank/Janet could work as older counterparts that don't necessarily anchor the Avengers in the modern day.

I don't mean to be dismissive, but you do realize that the excitement involvng the Avengers films has never been its comic book origins, right? It was just the best excuse to get the biggest superheroes Marvel still had the rights to on the screen together. S.H.I.E.L.D., Black Widow, Hawkeye...their only narrative purpose was to help facilitate these four entities interacting with one another. The fact that they existed within the Avengers comic book narrative was almost...beside the point, really.

I say this because I have to wonder if fans have really deluded themselves into thinking that Hank Pym was ever going to be a primary member of the team. Let's say an Ant-Man movie never existed. Let's say Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne were present from the first film onward, and perhaps even fought alongside the other Avengers. Do you really think they would have been fleshed out...like, at all? Of course not! They would have existed functioning in the same way Black Widow and Hawkeye did...as satellites orbiting the Big 4. Their story would be marginalized and brushed aside as soon as the big guns appeared together on screen.

That's just the way it is. The Avengers movie franchise exists for a very different reason than the comic books existed. The only thing I really fault Whedon with is using Ultron at all. Fans are going to expect certain things, and without Hank Pym, he becomes Ultron in name only.

But I totally get it. Whedon is a creator first, and a geek second. His geek side wants to see Ultron in his Avengers movie, but his creator side doesn't want to be beholden to the comics. "Ya, well, I can't make an Ultron character that meshes with the comic books? Then I'll make my own Ultron character, with blackjack and hookers!"

Personally, I trust Whedon to at least make Ultron compelling, with or without Hank Pym. Maybe that's not enough for some people. So be it.

BLack widow? a satelite? She was one of the best developed characters in Avengers

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by childeroland

Plenty of male-led action films fail, yet the actors' gender is not blamed. Why should it be different for women? Especially since far more male-led action films are made than female-led action films?

Try this one: it's like making a story about Frankenstein's Monster without Dr. Frankenstein.

We've been over this many, many times. The only thing that separates Ultron's story from any other uberkiller robot is the psychodrama of Ultron's Oedipus complex with Hank and Janet. That's what's driven Ultron for five decades, even on up to the present-day Age of Ultron story arc (that doesn't have anything to do with the movie title).

Try this one: it's like making a story about Frankenstein's Monster without Dr. Frankenstein.

We've been over this many, many times. The only thing that separates Ultron's story from any other uberkiller robot is the psychodrama of Ultron's Oedipus complex with Hank and Janet. That's what's driven Ultron for five decades, even on up to the present-day Age of Ultron story arc (that doesn't have anything to do with the movie title).

So now....we get any other uberkiller robot.

Totally agree here. I don't want the Avengers to fight just another killer robot and taking Pym out of the equation really kinda boils Ultron down to just that. Now Joss may tack some sort of origin on to Stark as the creator but that seems totally out of place given what we know of Stark. Just pretty disappointed with this news.

Yeah I was never a Pym fan either
and as long as they can properly develop the drama with the character's that are there, i'll be happy.
I could see Jarvis gaining sentience and flipping a **** at stark, leading to ultron being born.. or something like that
guess it would take to much time to introduce Pym and properly develop his relationship to Ultron in one movie that has 10 other major characters.

that said, I'm still pretty shocked about this news
would've thought they'd hold off on ultron til part 3

Try this one: it's like making a story about Frankenstein's Monster without Dr. Frankenstein.

We've been over this many, many times. The only thing that separates Ultron's story from any other uberkiller robot is the psychodrama of Ultron's Oedipus complex with Hank and Janet. That's what's driven Ultron for five decades, even on up to the present-day Age of Ultron story arc (that doesn't have anything to do with the movie title).

So now....we get any other uberkiller robot.

Or, more likely, another character gets cast in the role of Frankenstein.

No, Pym is the predecessor replaced by the Scott Lang, who is the sort of protégé according to intitial reports of Wright's script.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Question

Or, more likely, another character gets cast in the role of Frankenstein.

I think given that Hulk was so popular in Avengers, and given Banner's understanding of physics and what not, more so than a biologist from what I gather, it could be some Stark/Banner combo. Or most likely just Stark. But I think they want Hulk to have a prominent role. It's the Hulk. You cannot relegate that in favor of Giant-Man or some less popular Avenger from an individual standpoint. That's why Banner could fill that role. Then you incorporate Vision, SW, QS, and there is no room to add Janet/Hank and fans will complain about development issues.

its important to note that these initial reports were a long time ago.

So I don't think it's safe to assume either way at this point. Could be Pym could be Lang.

From a cinematic standpoint, it fits. They want comedy, so the young guy/old guy dynamic could be in play. You need character dynamic to make comedy work; it's never just one guy in most successful comedies.

Then add the element of that heist noir, and you generally have the older guy pulling the strings and mentoring the younger guy. So if these elements come into play, it makes sense from a creative standpoint. I don't think Wright would have removed his central character just to be amenable to the MCU. I don't think he would have signed on if he didn't hold that kind of creative power.

From a cinematic standpoint, it fits. They want comedy, so the young guy/old guy dynamic could be in play. You need character dynamic to make comedy work; it's never just one guy in most successful comedies.

Then add the element of that heist noir, and you generally have the older guy pulling the strings and mentoring the younger guy. So if these elements come into play, it makes sense from a creative standpoint. I don't think Wright would have removed his central character just to be amenable to the MCU. I don't think he would have signed on if he didn't hold that kind of creative power.

Eugh...

I'm sorry, you've got a fine analysis there and you may very well be right. But it sounds bad to me.

Like, Scott Lang showing up as Ant-Man in Phase 3 after Ultron is already (most probably) defeated. Thus Wasp not being likely as an Avenger alongside him because she is old. Unless they make her the young Lang's romance and not Pym. wut...??!

It all seems so trite. Inane at best. None of that sounds like what Marvel has built up with Phase 1. It's all so far from the comics and makes me sad.

I'm sorry, you've got a fine analysis there and you may very well be right. But it sounds bad to me.

Like, Scott Lang showing up as Ant-Man in Phase 3 after Ultron is already (most probably) defeated. Thus Wasp not being likely as an Avenger alongside him because she is old. Unless they make her the young Lang's romance and not Pym. wut...??!

It all seems so trite. Inane at best. None of that sounds like what Marvel has built up with Phase 1. It's all so far from the comics and makes me sad.

Thus, I reiterate, "Eugh."

Wasp could be the Judi Dench of the series... But nah, I don't see that happening (Janet being Lang's lover). Probably another love interest will be incorporated. But who, as of now, is filling that older, matriarchal role in the franchise? You just can't have bombshells for every female character.
I'd like to see a seasoned, female lead for a change, possibly in PIII.

An older Wasp also gives you material for a more flamboyant, 60's-70's style MCU movie, should they be saving characters for an adaptation in that time period. I'm not saying that's what Marvel is thinking though. But considering some of the cheesy abilities in play, it's worth a thought. No doubt Lang's character is going to be an updated take, and we'll see Matrix style action. But should they want to revisit some MCU backstory and fill the time between Cap: TFA and the modern MCU, Hank could fit right in there.

I kind of dig the idea of Hank and Janet as superheroes from the 1960s. However, supposing that we want them to be contemporary characters, why not the following:

Have Hank Pym be introduced in Avengers 2 as the antagonist. Kind of a villain, but not quite: he's not evil, but a misguided, idealistic scientist whose creation gets out of control. And because he sentimentally thinks of his creation as a unique, living being, he actively works agains the Avengers to protect his child.

At the end of the movie, he realizes his mistake. He "betrays" his creation, which leads to the utter hatred his creation will now have for him. Stark, Banner and Rogers see Pym in his prison cell, and reason that Pym could do a lot more good as an ally rather than as an inmate. Then AntMan, in whatever incarnation, can stem from that story.

This helps establish Hank as the morally compromised superhero, without having him have to punch Janet. That won't work in today's political climate, no way.

__________________

Mandroid. Mercenary. Scientist. Ninja. Each one a specialist. Together they are ...

Let's say Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne were present from the first film onward, and perhaps even fought alongside the other Avengers. Do you really think they would have been fleshed out...like, at all? Of course not! They would have existed functioning in the same way Black Widow and Hawkeye did...as satellites orbiting the Big 4. Their story would be marginalized and brushed aside as soon as the big guns appeared together on screen.

And that's the writer's and director's fault for giving more screen time on cheesy one liners and a kiddie storyline. "Oh, how cool a random shield agent dressed in an expensive suit with a tie, forced in our throats and becoming a hero like the Avengers instead of replacing him with pivotal characters that founded the Avengers. He is so badass that he gets to shoot with an alien pistol too before he dies heroically"

That's why I didn't care for this movie. It was all cool cgi effects and predictable dialogue while pissing off on Hank and Janet's legacy. And hated how the shield agents were wearing ordinary collar suits. I think it lacked magic and comic book nostalgia.

And that's the writer's and director's fault for giving more screen time on cheesy one liners and a kiddie storyline. "Oh, how cool a random shield agent dressed in an expensive suit with a tie, forced in our throats and becoming a hero like the Avengers instead of replacing him with pivotal characters that founded the Avengers. He is so badass that he gets to shoot with an alien pistol too before he dies heroically"

That's why I didn't care for this movie. It was all cool cgi effects and predictable dialogue while pissing off on Hank and Janet's legacy. And hated how the shield agents were wearing ordinary collar suits. I think it lacked magic and comic book nostalgia.

Did someone just actually complain about Coulson? Like, in real life?

__________________"I've been running scams on the street since I was ten. I was kicked out of the flight academy for having a mind of my own. I'm going be a pilot. Best in the galaxy."

Considering they are doing an Ant-Man film, I don't tihnk that is a fair argument.

They are, but that's not an ensemble like Avengers so they don't have to worry about all the other characters. Even saying that I have more concerns about Ant-Man than any other Marvel film, including Guardians of the Galaxy. We'll see.

Edit: Plus they could presumably simplify things in an Ant-Man solo. He doesn't need to fly around and fight a bunch of aliens/robots/alien-robots like he would in an Avengers film.

They are, but that's not an ensemble like Avengers so they don't have to worry about all the other characters. Even saying that I have more concerns about Ant-Man than any other Marvel film, including Guardians of the Galaxy. We'll see.

Why? Edgar Wright is making it.

__________________"I've been running scams on the street since I was ten. I was kicked out of the flight academy for having a mind of my own. I'm going be a pilot. Best in the galaxy."